Morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven [Conn.]) 1848-1894, 1887-04-26

Once a Preacher hut Now q Horse
Thief and CrtmfnaI.

| once a Preacher But Now q Horse
Thief and Criminal.
| BRocKToN, Mass, April 25.-In the police
court this morning the ex-Rev. Arthur Ill
Morrison, of West Bridgewater, was arraigned
on two charges The first was that of stealing
a team valned at $500 in Baltimore on the
9th inst. and the latter for carrying concealed
weapons. He was bound over until Thurs
| day to await the arrival of Baltimore officers,
| being held in the sum of 81 900 ON the first
charge and $500 on the latter. Another
charge is likely to be brought against him.
Four weeks ago he was in New York showing
a letter which purported to be signed by the
Rev. Mr.. Dunbar of the Cohasset M E.
church recommending him to religious soele-
ties disciple of Christianity, etc. His
suave manner gained him much eonsidera-
ton until a letter of inquiry cent to West
Bridgewater led to an exposure. Mr.. Dunbar
was informed of the facts and started for
New York to hunt up Morrison, but the lat
ter learned of his danger and decamped to
Baltimore where he again got into trouble as
above stated. Morrison was arraigned last
June charged with forgery and has served
term in the penitentiary. He once preached
ia Williamsburg, Ky, and left because his
actions had created suspicion. In manner
in clerical fashion. The police regard him
as dangerous man to be at large and full
justice will probably be melted out to him.
THAT PARNELL LETTEHs AGAIN
Raises a Breeze i'm the House of
Commons.
LONDON, April 25.-In the House of Com
mons this evening Mr.. w. St. J. Brodrick,
Conservative member for Guildford, in reply
to direct question from Mr.. Sexton admit
ted that he had in a recent speech alluded to
the fac simile letter published in the Times
as "Mr. Parnell's letter" and stated that
whenever he might have occasion to refer to
it in his speeches he would continue, in the
absence of any action in a court Of law on
the part of Mr.. Parnell to prove that it was
not his letter, to SO designate it. It was now
popular to allude to it as "Mr. Parnell's let
ter" and the justice of the speculation could
be safely left to the affirmation of the House
or the country. Mr.. Sexton said he thought,
in view of the fact that Mr.. Parnell had
denied the authenticity of the publication,
that Mr.. Brodrick in describing it as sMr.
ParnelFs letter" was guilty of breach of
privilege, inasmuch as such designation was
tantamount to imputing falsehood to Mr..
Parne1l. The Speaker said Mr.. Brodrick
had not referred to anything that
Mr. Parnell had said or done in the
House, therefore his Characterization of the
letter did not come within the definition of
breach of privilege. The House then went
into committee of the whole on the budget.
Mr.. Gladstone commended that the chief pro-
posals of the budget were entirely at var
lance with sound financial principles. Re
garding the income tax proposal he said the
reduction of a penny to the pound was Pc
culiar boon, but at the same time the proposal
was against every principle of sound
finance because such reduction should
arise from a rigid system of public
economy and not be made at the expense of
the sinking fund. AS to the reduction of
the sinking fund he did not think the
shrinking of the fund from e7, 1000, 900 to
e5, 100000 was warranted by the excellent
financial condition of the country. Lord
Randolph Churchill took the same grounds
against the proposals that Mr.. Gladstone
had taken and warmly endorsed that gentle
mans remarks. The debate was continued
to some length. Mr.. Goschen delivered
patriotic speech in defense of the principles
upon which the proposals were founded and
in justification of the proposals singly and
collectively.
The budget resolutions were agresd to, the
committee arose and the House adjourned.